TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: To capitalize or not? From:Robert Lauriston <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com> To:techwr-l <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com> Date:Thu, 9 Jun 2016 17:46:31 -0700
To me, an "internal port" would be inside of the case. One real-world
example, a server appliance I documented had an internal USB port. If
you opened up the case you could attach a USB thumb drive ... I forget
for what purpose. Anyway, it was not accessible during normal
operation since it was inside the case.
An "external port" would be something typically flush with the surface
of the case, like the USB ports on a laptop. If the device had more
than one external port, I would argue strenuously against naming any
of them External, and suggest a different name based on the port's
function.
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 5:30 PM, William Sherman
<bsherman77 -at- embarqmail -dot- com> wrote:
> ... ask them why they called it External Port, as it is still internal to
> the device. It should be named for its function: Output, Input, Source,
> Incoming, Outgoing, RS-232, External Controller, External Power, External
> Keyboard, etc.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | http://techwhirl.com
